Wollstonecraft and Defoe: Same Sex Marriage?

Mary Wollstonecraft and Daniel Defoe were two writers whose works played an important role in the feminist movements of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Each of their essays revolved upon their feminist philosophies of giving more rights to women, most especially with regards to allowing women to pursue an education. In today’s society, although women now have various rights and opportunities, there appears to be another move for civil rights — the move for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender rights. Although much controversy has arisen over the issue of same sex marriage — both in the realms of state and religious laws — one cannot help but wonder how Mary Wollstonecraft and Daniel Defoe, two of the most significant figures of the feminist movement, would react to the ever-rising debate. The answer, however, simply lies between the lines of A Vindication of the Rights of Woman and The Education of Women.

In her Introduction to A Vindication of the Rights of Woman, although she encourages women to attain masculinity in terms of establishing themselves as a character, Mary Wollstonecraft specifically asserts that the physical role of masculinity itself should not be applied to women. In fact, she states that “I am aware of an obvious inference:—from every quarter have I heard exclamations against masculine women; but where are they to be found? If by this appellation men mean to inveigh against their ardour in hunting, shooting, and gaming, I shall most cordially join in the cry” (Wollstonecraft). Instead, she acknowledges a woman’s role as a wife as she claims that women “spend many of the first years of their lives in acquiring a smattering of accomplishments; meanwhile strength of body and mind are sacrificed to libertine notions of beauty, to the desire of establishing themselves,—the only way women can rise in the world,—by marriage”(Wollstonecraft), in addition to acknowledging a woman’s role as a mother, as she states that an uneducated woman cannot be “expected to govern a family with judgment, or take care of the poor babes whom they bring into the world” (Wollstonecraft). Through this, readers can imply that Wollstonecraft not only criticizes, but also emphasizes the more feminine aspects of a woman — as a gentle, loving wife and mother — but would nonetheless not have a woman take up the masculine role of hunting, shooting, gaming, or anything that is essentially a man’s responsibility. Hence, we can conclude that she would be against the whole idea of a “butch.” Furthermore, she acknowledges the fact that “in the government of the physical world, it is observable that the female in point of strength is, in general, inferior to the male” (Wollstonecraft) and thus renders females to be forever “dependent on men in the various relations of life” (Wollstonecraft). Hence, she would expect men to play the more masculine role upon which the women could depend on.

Moreover, Wollstonecraft criticizes marriage itself as she claims that women have the “desire of establishing themselves,—the only way women can rise in the world,—by marriage. And this desire making mere animals of them, when they marry they act as such children may be expected to act;—they dress; they paint; and nickname God’s creatures.—Surely these weak beings are only fit for a seraglio!” (Wollstonecraft). Looking further into Wollstonecraft’s life and comparing it with her work, readers are able to see how such an opinion of marriage is a direct reflection of her experiences. In the brief summary of Mary Wollstonecraft’s life provided in the packet, it is written that “The last place Wollstonecraft felt she would ever find justice in eighteenth-century England was in the institution of marriage. ‘I will not marry,’ she announced, a decision born from years of emotionally and physically protecting her mother from the abuse and anger of a husband and father who had squandered his fortune in futile attempts to become a successful gentleman farmer. Wollstonecraft’s upbringing had left her with good reason to distrust the bond of marriage” (Elements of Literature). Thus, one can conclude that Wollstonecraft would be against same sex marriage, simply because she was completely against marriage in its entirety.

Daniel Defoe, on the other hand, would have a quite clearer stance on the issue, as his arguments and essay as a whole constantly reflect upon God and his religious views. For instance, he states that “if knowledge and understanding had been useless additions to the sex, GOD Almighty would never have given them capacities; for he made nothing needless" (Defoe). Thus, he is always able to connect his arguments with some sort of religious aspect. In The Education of Women, Defoe praises the feminine characteristics of women, claiming that “GOD Almighty ever made them so delicate, so glorious creatures; and furnished them with such charms, so agreeable and so delightful to mankind” (Defoe). Thus, readers can imply that he, too, would most likely not be too fond of the idea of a “butch.”

Furthermore, Defoe specifically states that “I would have men take women for companions, and educate them to be fit for it" (Defoe). Through this statement alone, and on top of all his religious views, readers can imply that he would most likely be against same sex marriage in its entirety. This specific passage is also quite interesting in itself, as Defoe gives off the impression that he fought for women’s rights to an education, ultimately because it would make them better companions for men.

On a more personal note, however, I have nothing against same sex marriage and completely support it. I believe gender is defined not by our physical appearances, but by our true characters within — true characters that every individual has the right to not only embrace, but also express. At the end of the day, as the infamous saying goes, whether it’s boy and girl, or boy and boy, or girl and girl — love is love.

Works Cited:

Defoe, Daniel. "The Education of Women". Elements of Literature. Literature of Britain with World Classics. 6th ed.  Austin: Holt, Rinehard, and Winston, 2000. 647-649. Print

Wollstonecraft, Mary. "A Vindication of the Rights of Woman." Elements of Literature. Literature of Britain with World Classics. 6th ed. Austin: Holt, Rinehard, and Winston, 2000. 639-643. Print.

Wollstonecraft and Defoe's Effective Use of Rhetorical Devices

Through their works of A Vindication of the Rights of Woman and The Education of Women, writers Mary Wollstonecraft and Daniel Defoe, respectively, have become two of the most significant figures in the movement for women’s rights. Their feminist philosophies, more specifically in terms of women being allowed to pursue an education, are clearly reflected in each of their works. However, the effectiveness of both A Vindication of the Rights of Woman and The Education of Women is not solely attributable to each writer’s claim in his/her essay. Rather, what ultimately strengthens each writer’s purpose is the means by which they express such arguments — the use of various rhetorical devices.

One of the first rhetorical devices evident in both essays is the use of rhetorical questions. Both writers effectively ask a question for which an answer is not expected, more than likely because they suppose readers will be able to agree with the opinion being expressed through such questions. In A Vindication of the Rights of Woman, Wollstonecraft criticizes how marriage — the only way women could establish a social status at the time — made women seem as mere animals and children who belonged in a harem. She then continues with a rhetorical question, asking “can they be expected to govern a family with judgment, or take care of the poor babes whom they bring into the world?” (Wollstonecraft). Thus, Wollstonecraft not only points out and criticizes the fact that a woman’s main ambition in life revolves around perfecting her beauty in order to get married, but also further strengthens her argument by a rhetorical question — a question from which readers could agree that such a woman would be unfit for raising a family.

Similarly, in The Education of Women, Defoe’s central claim is founded upon the fact that women are denied the advantages of learning, even in such a civilized and Christianized country. He then continues with a set of rhetorical questions, through which he dismisses a few of the supposed reasons why women are kept in ignorance. For example, he asks “Does she plague us with her pride and impertinence? Why did we not let her learn, that she might have had more wit?” (Defoe). Thus, he not only addresses the suppositions that an educated woman would be all the more arrogant, disrespectful, and witty, but also essentially dismisses the same assumptions, as they are rendered indefensible reasons for keeping women in ignorance.

Another rhetorical device that creates effective pieces of arguments in A Vindication of the Right’s of Woman and The Education of Women is the use of analogy. In her Introduction, Wollstonecraft stresses that women are denied proper educations and render them to be in an unhealthy state of mind. She builds up her argument through an analogy, as she states that “the conduct and manners of women, in fact, evidently prove that their minds are not in a healthy state; for, like the flowers which are planted in too rich a soil, strength and usefulness are sacrificed to beauty; and the flaunting leaves, after having pleased a fastidious eye, fade, disregarded on the stalk, long before the season why they ought to have arrived at maturity” (Wollstonecraft). Thus, through such an analogy, Wollstonecraft successfully indicates how women, like flowers, are cultivated to rely on their beauty alone. However, just as the leaves which were once pleasing to the eye will soon wilt and be unnoticed on the stalk, so too will a woman’s beauty soon fade with age. Thus, in arguing by analogy, Wollstonecraft is able to point out the parallel that exists between the beauty of a flower and the beauty that women revolve their whole life upon — a parallel that creates an even more effective argument as it unravels the sole fact that the same beauty soon diminishes.

In the same way, Defoe argues that women are denied the advantages of learning, and he too uses an analogy to advance his argument. He asserts that “the soul is placed in the body like a rough diamond; and must be polished, or the luster of it will never appear. And ‘tis manifest, that as the rational soul distinguishes us from brutes; so education carries on the distinction, and makes some less brutish than others” (Defoe). Through his analogy, Defoe allows readers to imply that polish is to diamond as educate is to man. He is able to strengthen his argument and purpose all the more as he efficiently reveals the parallel that exists between polishing a diamond and the education of all men, regardless of gender; for just as a diamond must be polished in order to shine and hence increase in value, so too must mankind be educated in order to attain more significance than just a mere creature.

In the end, A Vindication of the Rights of Woman and The Education of Women have become two of the most effective pieces of works with regards to the movement for women’s rights. Ultimately, Mary Wollstonecraft and Daniel Defoe’s writings were able to set the spark that kindled the fire in the rise of the feminist movement — an effectiveness that not only resulted because of what each writer said, but even more because of how they got their arguments across. The use of rhetorical devices, including rhetorical questions and argument by analogy, allowed Wollstonecraft and Defoe to create effective languages, reinforce their main points, and — slowly but surely — win their readers over to their point of view.

Works Cited: 

Defoe, Daniel. "The Education of Women". Elements of Literature. Literature of Britain with World Classics. 6th ed.  Austin: Holt, Rinehard, and Winston, 2000. 647-649. Print

Wollstonecraft, Mary. "A Vindication of the Rights of Woman." Elements of Literature. Literature of Britain with World Classics. 6th ed. Austin: Holt, Rinehard, and Winston, 2000. 639-643. Print.